¹ As in most matters concerning Luke's theology, cf. Conzelmann, H., Die Mitte der Zeit ⁴ (Tübingen, 1962)Google Scholar. Also helpful among more recent general studies are: Robinson, W. C. Jr., Der Weg des Herrn (Hamburg, 1964)Google Scholar, Flender, H., Heil und Geschichte in der Theologie des Lukas (Munich, 1965)Google Scholar, and Brown, S., S.J., Apostasy and Perseverance in the Theology of Luke (Analecta Biblica 36; Rome, 1969)Google Scholar.

On the Travel Narrative in particular, Girard, L., L'Évangile des Voyages de Jesus (Paris, 1951)Google Scholar, has the earlier bibliography. Schneider, J., Zur Analyse des lukanischen Reiseberichts, Synoptische Studien (A. Wikenhauser Festschrift) (Munich, 1953), 207–29Google Scholar, summarizes results up to the date of writing. See, too, ibid., 20–52, J. Blinzler, Die literarische Eigenart des sogennanten Reiseberichts im Lukasevangelium, with bibliography of monographs on the Travel Narrative since 1910. More recent items of interest are: G. W. H. Lampe, The Holy Spirit in the Writings of St. Luke, in Studies in the Gospels, ed. Nineham, D. E. (Oxford, 1955), 159–200Google Scholar, and ibid., 37–53, C. F. Evans, The Central Section of St. Luke's Gospel; Reicke, B., Instruction and Discussion in the Travel Narrative, Studia Evangelica I (1959) (= T.U. 73), 164–69Google Scholar; Grundmann, W., Fragen der Komposition des lukanischen “Reiseberichts,” ZNW (1959), 252ff.Google Scholar; W. C. Robinson, Jr., The Theological Context for Interpreting Luke's Travel Narrative (9, 51ff.), JBL (1960), 20–31; J. H. Davies, The Purpose of the Central Section of St. Luke's Gospel, Studia Evangelica II (1964) (= T.U. 87), 164–69, and ibid., 195–202, M. D. Goulder, The Chiastic Structure of the Lucan Journey; Stagg, F., The Journey toward Jerusalem in Luke's Gospel, Review and Expositor (1967), 499–512Google Scholar; Navone, J., The Way of the Lord, Scripture (1968), 24–30Google Scholar.

For my own researches Prof. George MacRae, S.J., has rendered generous and valuable assistance.

² The journey situation is mentioned or alluded to in 9:51; 9:53; 9:56; 9:57; 10:1; 10:38; 13:22; 13:31; 13:33; (13:35); 14:25; 17:11; (18:31); (18:35); 18:36; 19:1; 19:11; (19:28); (19:29); (19:36); 19:37; 19:41; (19:45). The passages in parentheses are not peculiar to Luke. Note that the Reisenotizen are particularly numerous at the beginning and end of the narrative.

³ See especially Schneider, 219ff., and Reicke, 209ff. The latter summarizes the contents: “(1) instruction of the apostles regarded (a) as leaders and teachers of the Christians, i.e., as ministers, and (b) as missionaries; and (2) discussion with adversaries and opponents” (210).

⁴ Schneider, 216f. Conzelmann, 56f.

⁵ JBL (1960), 27.

⁶ P. 216. My conclusion, arrived at independently and by other means, will agree in part with that of Reicke.

⁷ As Robinson, for example, seems to suggest (JBL [1960], 29).

⁸ P. 38. Cf. also Conzelmann, 58f.

⁹ Noted by Davies, 166. F. Hauck and S. Schulz, Kittel, TWNT, s.v., see no special significance in Luke's use of the word as against the rest of the N.T.

¹⁰ Conzelmann, 50, 57, 60, 141ff.

¹¹ Cf. Davies, 167. The expression can refer to determination in a neutral sense as in Is. 50:7 and Jer. 42:17. The hostile sense is attested especially in Ezekiel (6:2; 13:17; 14:8; 15:7; et passim). Davies prefers the latter here, i.e., Jesus' journey will have effects which are hostile to the Jews.

¹² P. 211.

¹³ The fact that Christ makes these demands “along the road” (ν τῇ δῷ) may also have significance in the discipleship connection. See the discussion in footnote 29.

¹⁴ Conzelmann, 59.

¹⁵ There is also an allusion to the sending out of the Seventy in 22:35, in a passage on the demands of discipleship.

¹⁶ The parable of the good Samaritan (10:29–37) immediately precedes the story of Martha and Mary, and one would expect it to have a Reisenotiz in the light of what we have said about the Gentile mission. Also, the episode of the ten lepers (17:11–19), where a Samaritan appears in a good light in comparison with Jews, does have a Reisenotiz. Further, the good Samaritan story corrects false notions about discipleship. There are indications, which I hesitate to press too hard, that do seem to tie the parable in with the travel motif. First and most obvious, everyone in the parable is on the road. Secondly, the Samaritan is said to be δεων (v. 33), a hapax legomenon in the N.T. (cf. footnote 29); and finally, the travel word πορεομαι appears in v. 37.

¹⁷ Conzelmann, 60.

¹⁸ We might have expected Reisenotizen with the teaching on humility (14:7–14) and the parable of the great supper (14:15–24).

¹⁹ Luke's version of the logion, being harsher, may represent the original; leaving it unchanged serves his purposes better. On the other hand, the phrase “cannot be my disciple” looks like a Lukan alteration.

The “going with” in the compound συμπορεομαι (v. 25) may contain a further hint of the connection between discipleship and the journey to Jerusalem. Recall 9:57, where similar harsh demands are made “along the road” (cf. footnotes 13 and 29).

²⁰ Chapter 15 is wholly taken up with the three parables on God's mercy to sinners. 16 has the parable of the unjust Steward (1–13), an attack on the Pharisees (14–15), the law on divorce (16–18), and Dives and Lazarus (19–31). 17:1–6 is a series of short admonitions on the subjects of scandal, forgiveness and faith, followed in vv. 7–10 by the parable of the servant's wages.

²¹ The word πρσωπον, important in 9:51–53 and 10:1, occurs in v. 16: “he fell on his face.” The expression is common enough (cf. Mt. 17:6), and should not be pressed for special significance here.

²² Luke may not have felt the need of a Reisenotiz here. The three episodes in 18:9–30 form a group on the theme of the demands of discipleship, and they are immediately followed by the third prediction of the Passion in 18:31–34, which does mention the journey and Jerusalem. Further, it stresses the disciples' lack of understanding and leads over to the cure of the blind man. See infra.

²³ De compositione evangelii Marci, Verbum Domini (1966), 133–41.

²⁴ This is also a confirmation of de la Potterie's interpretation of Mark; Luke interprets him the same way.

²⁵ Conzelmann, 66f.

²⁶ Ibid., 68ff.

²⁷ The rejection of Jesus by the Jews is connected with the Gentile mission in the journey context in 13:22ff.; 17:11ff. (the ten lepers) and possibly in 10:29ff. (the good Samaritan). On the other hand, individual Jews are saved on the journey; Bartimaeus (by faith) in 18:35ff. and Zacchaeus (“also a son of Abraham”) in 19:1ff. On Luke's attitude toward Israel and the Jews, see Conzelmann, 135ff.

²⁸ Robinson (JBL [1960], 30) sees the connection between the journey and the mission in terms of authentic witness; “For Luke God's revelation is the revelation of a way ‥ ‥ and so witnesses of God's revelation are witnesses of this δς, from Jesus' εἴσοδος to his ἔξοδος. Thus Christian witness was based on the testimony of those constituted as witnesses by (1) their presence during Jesus' Galilean ministry, (2) their following Jesus on the trip to Jerusalem, and (3) their witnessing the resurrection.” See also Conzelmann, 32, 40, 41.

²⁹ Does the expression τ ν τῇ δῷ here anticipate Luke's use of the word δς in Acts to mean the Christian life and teaching? It is impossible to say with full certainty. There are, however, indications to that effect. δς refers to doctrine in the expression τν δν το θεο in 20:21, and we have seen above (footnote 13) the possible connection between δς and discipleship in the demands Jesus makes on his followers in 9:57ff. Recall also the occurrence of the unique δεων in the parable of the good Samaritan (10:33, and footnote 16).

³⁰ This raises for students of Gemeindetheologie the interesting question of whether Matthew and Mark intended to make the connection which Luke read in their order of events.